Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar
ORDER The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-1, Noida dated 29.10.2018.
Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:
“1. That the notice u/s 143(2) of Income Tax Act has not been issued by the Ld. AO before framing the assessment order. Therefore, the Assessment Order passed u/s 147/144) on 30.10.2017 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are illegal and bad in law and without jurisdiction.
2. That on the facts and circumstances CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal U/s 148 on the basis of non-payment of stipulated amount for taking stay u/s 249(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
That the assessee is an Indian farmer and does not have any source of Income other than agriculture. Also, the bank account of the assessee had already been seized by the Income Tax department. Therefore, he could not provide any amount to IT department for Narendra granting him stay before filing an appeal before Ld. CIT.
That the addition made are illegal and bad in law and have been wrongly made.
5. That CIT(A) has erred in conforming the action of the AO in making the addition and assessing the income at Rs. 27,13,920 during relevant assessment year. Rs.20,56,425/- 6. That the assessee had received monetary compensation in one of his saving bank account which was withdrawn by him in cash and subsequently, deposited in his another saving bank account near to his residence.
That the addition of Rs. 27,13,920/- on account of unexplained expenditure u/s 69 of the Act has been wrongly and illegally made by the AO and further wrongly upheld by CIT(A).
That CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of AO in making the addition by rejecting the appeal and not considering the supporting documents (Bank Statement).
Without prejudice, AO and CIT(A) has erred in not considering the evidences provided by the Assessee in support of cash deposit in his saving bank account.
That the evidence filed and materials available on record have not been properly construed and judiciously interpreted, hence the addition / disallowance made are uncalled for.
That the observation and the additions made. are unjust, illegal, arbitrary, bad in law, highly excessive and based on surmise conjecture.
That interest U/s 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been wrongly and illegally charged and has been wrongly worked out.”
Narendra 3. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record.
4. The assessment has been completed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. On perusal of the Assessment Order, order of the ld. CIT(A) and statement of facts, it is found that no prejudice would be caused to the revenue if an opportunity is given to the assessee to represent himself properly before the revenue authorities. Hence, the matter is remanded to the file the AO to adjudicate the issue afresh de novo. The assessee shall comply promptly to the notices issued by the revenue from time to time and shall not misuse the opportunity given by the Tribunal.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 20/06/2023.